www.gsdrc.org [email protected] Helpdesk Research Report Urban governance in Tanzania Emilie Combaz 25.06.2015 Question Please identify key literature on urban governance in Tanzania. Contents 1. Overview 2. State of knowledge 3. Political economy in diverse urban contexts 4. Land use, urban farming, and land property 5. Provision of public goods and services 6. About this report 1. Overview Urbanisation has been increasing quickly in Tanzania. The share of the population who lives in cities had reached nearly 30 per cent by 2012 - an average annual increase of 6 per cent since 1967 and twice the rate of population growth (Wenban-Smith, 2014: 4). Up to 80 per cent of these urban residents live in informal settlements, with few basic services (UNICEF, 2012: 1). The opportunities and challenges urbanisation generates for development have been well documented. In this context, many authors emphasise that making urbanisation work for development is not just about technical issues such as physically building infrastructure. It is inherently about formal and informal political decision-making over the collective functioning and organisation of city life: it is about urban governance. What recent knowledge is available to shed light on urban governance in Tanzania? Available literature is limited, but it is methodologically strong and covers a wide range of dimensions (see section 2 for details). Key points include the following. Taking into account the political economy of diverse urban contexts is essential to understand how urban governance functions and to identify possibilities for improvement. - For urban planning, political economy analyses offer crucial insights on the conflicting interests at play. Policies and processes for urban planning have generally remained top-down and captured by powerful actors. This has marginalised groups such as the poor and urban farmers, who have often resisted dynamics that disadvantaged them. In turn, this has put pressure on local and national Tanzanian authorities. In addition, municipal processes for urban planning are often complicated, with low technical and financial capacities, and some limitations to decentralisation. Local authorities are also not committed to deeper citizen participation. Authors’ recommendations include: ensuring that genuine two-way engagement takes place; treating access to urban services and spaces as rights; empowering municipalities through capacity-building and funding; and ensuring that local government is accountable to the public. - Several groups are disadvantaged in urban governance, although they have also displayed capacities for resistance and empowerment. They include: persons living in poverty, especially in informal settlements (particularly renters); women; children; and refugees. Social movements and political mobilisations have had mixed success in advancing disadvantaged groups’ rights and interests. Several authors argue that ensuring these groups’ participation requires legitimising and guaranteeing their place in urban planning. - Rural-urban linkages, and small- and medium-sized cities, are often overlooked, and yet they are important dimensions of urbanisation and urban governance. Land use, urban farming, and land property are major issues in urban governance. - Customary land rights and formal land allocations have tended to conflict and coalesce into land disputes. Several authors recommend making urban planning inclusive, clear and fair, so that it brings together all stakeholders and both formal and informal land allocation systems. Fair compensation for forced evictions is widely demanded in the literature. - Urban farming has a number of benefits for farmers, landholders, governments and local communities. However, allocation of land for urban farming has been neglected, and farmers have often been marginalised. Various authors’ recommendations include: paying attention not only to tenure, but also to access; better supporting urban agriculture in national government; and, at local level, incorporating farming into urban planning, and providing clear regulations and incentives. - Formal land titling in cities is difficult to access for the poor, due to complicated procedures and costs of application. Formalisation has also tended to be top-down and to further marginalise the poor, such as urban farmers. The provision of sufficient and good-quality public goods and services is confirmed as a major stake in urban governance. - Some overarching themes emerge from references about informal and community-based provision of public goods and services, and references about specific sectors (mobility and transportation; water and sanitation and health; security and policing; education). In particular, public frameworks for consultation and compensation determine whether local residents will collaborate with, or oppose, public projects, and how much their voices shape service delivery. Social networks among residents also play an important role in having a voice and delivering services. Achieving inclusive and equal participation is difficult - for 2 GSDRC Helpdesk Research Report Urban governance in Tanzania marginalised groups to genuinely contribute, projects need to engage with all residents, and not only about implementation, but also about planning. - Disaster risk management and climate change adaptation are important challenges for urban governance: they require action but that are difficult to do well and to coordinate. 2. State of knowledge This rapid review of academic and grey literature published in the past five years found a small body of knowledge about urban governance in Tanzania, in contrast to a large number of references that document urbanisation in the country. Contributing experts confirmed that evidence specifically on the report topic is limited and eclectic (expert comments). Most key references on the topic were published over five years ago – this report focuses on recent publications, but the additional readings it lists do include the earlier publications mentioned by experts who provided suggestions for this report. Major findings on urban governance in Tanzania can be deemed conclusive, not just indicative, thanks to a combination of methodological rigour, methodological diversity, and general consistency. References found for this report were typically rigorous. The knowledge base as a whole was generated through a variety of qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods. Most of the literature is academic, with few references from practitioner and policy sources. Major findings on the most researched dimensions are generally consistent. Nonetheless, authors do have some differences in perspectives and, most of all, in their prescriptions. For instance, some authors explicitly support policies promoted by the World Bank on how to reform local government (e.g. Venugopal & Yilmaz, 2010), while other authors explicitly criticise World Bank policies on urban education (Dilger, 2013) or urban transportation (Rizzo, 2015). Another strength of the literature is its wide thematic coverage, which encompasses many cross-cutting aspects of urban governance, such as urban political economy, as well as various sectoral issues. However, available knowledge has some weaknesses and gaps in coverage. Thematically, some aspects have been researched by a number of authors (e.g. the governance of urban farming), while others are discussed in one or two references only (e.g. the provision of health services). Geographically, the literature is largely focused on Dar es Salaam. A handful of studies also consider a few other prominent urban settlements, such as Dodoma, Moshi and Zanzibar City. However there is a dearth of research on small towns, emerging urban settlements (e.g. around mining areas) and mid-sized cities. Lastly, few references offer findings that are systematically disaggregated by social group and inequality structure. When disaggregation is provided, typical categories are socio-economic status, education, working occupation, or housing status – and, more occasionally, religion or migration (internal or international). The literature thus largely fails to disaggregate findings on urban governance through the lens of gender, sexuality, age (especially youth and the elderly), ethnicity, and disability. Consideration of how these various social structures interplay (e.g. for women tenants who are poor) and how this affects urban governance is also scant and not systematic. 3 3. Political economy in diverse urban contexts Urban political economy Urban Sustainability at the Limits: Development Rhetorics and Realities in Tanzania Bissell, W. C. (2011). Development, 54(3), 317–324. http://doi.org/10.1057/dev.2011.63 Would the urban master plans that Tanzanian officials proposed in 2011 for Zanzibar City and Dar es Salaam improve living conditions for urban dwellers? This critical analysis draws on secondary literature about the history, politics, economics and sociology of urban planning in Tanzania and beyond. It finds that urban policies and plans have remained top-down. This has marginalised the poor and pathologised their survival strategies. The author argues that further growth will not solve the urban problems that free-market policies have created. He concludes that urban sustainability can only achieved by transforming the political culture, engaging citizens, and treating access to urban services and spaces as basic rights. The Political Economy of an Urban Megaproject: The Bus Rapid Transit Project in